* Josef Reidinger <jreidinger@suse.cz> [Jan 22. 2014 15:28]:
On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:18:13 +0100 Klaus Kaempf <kkaempf@suse.de> wrote:
* Martin Vidner <mvidner@suse.cz> [Jan 22. 2014 14:58]:
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 01:23:25PM +0100, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
I'd like to generate the following packages for Ruby 2.1
1. ruby-2.1 This would provide binaries (ruby, irb, rake, gem, ...) and a minimal set of documentation (changelog, readme, news, ...)
2. libruby2 This would only provide the libruby2.1.so.2.0.0 shared library
3. ruby-stdlib This would provide the /usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/ directory tree.
Which use case needs 1+2+3 separated?
Just for smaller maintenance updates.
I think it is not enough value to do it.
Doing it is simple, just more %package and %file tags.
It is more confusing to users. I think that if you want rid of multiversion there should be one "ruby" package that contains the latest upstream stable version.
Users won't notice since its handled by dependencies.
P.S. Thanks to write suggestion on mailing list before you start implementing ;)
Well, I did start implementing the new scheme in home:kwk:ruby to get some idea about its complexity. It turned out to be pretty simple. Klaus -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+owner@opensuse.org